CAROLINE H. MCDOWELL, EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF JESSE C. MCDOWELL, DECEASED
v.
D. B. HEINER, COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE
CAROLINE H. MCDOWELL, EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF JESSE C. MCDOWELL, DECEASED
D. B. HEINER, COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE
273 U.S. 759
Supreme Court of the United States (1927)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 8 cases
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Parke v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 142 F.2d 437 (2d Cir. 1944)…smen and to the relatively small number of complaints that have been made in proportion to the large number of prospects interviewed. Compare, Harriet Hubbard Ayer, Inc., v. Federal Trade Commission, 2 Cir., 15 F. 2d 274, 277, 278, certiorari denied 273 U.S. 759, 47 S.Ct. 473, 71 L.Ed. 878. They are, indeed, entitled to commendation for so doing, but this argument overlooks a further provision of the rule, which states that all literature and other aids supplied to the salesmen must be “free from misleadin…
-
Reams v. Vrooman-Fehn Printing Co., 140 F.2d 237 (6th Cir. 1944)…are an integral part of the tax and interwoven into it. They are administrative penalties and are within the impeding statute just as much as primary taxes. McDowell v. Heiner, D.C.Pa., 9 F. 2d 120, affirmed 3 Cir., 15 F. 2d 1015, certiorari denied, 273 U.S. 759, 47 S.Ct. 473, 71 L.Ed. 877. Appellee claims there are present in the case extraordinary and unusual circumstances which would impel the court to waive the statute and to use its broad equity powers to prevent appellee from being subjected to what…
-
In re Petition for Naturalization of Charles Peter Duncan. Charles Peter Duncan v. United States, 713 F.2d 538 (9th Cir. 1983)…o indication that due process was not afforded nor statutory requirements fulfilled. We see no manifest injustice in precluding him from raising those issues again. AFFIRMED. . In United States v. Pandit, 15 F. 2d 285 (9th Cir.1926), cert. denied, 273 U.S. 759, 47 S.Ct. 473, 71 L.Ed. 878 (1927), this court took a position directly contrary to that expressed in Ness. Given the Supreme Court’s clear and obvious holdings both prior and subsequent to Pandit, we do not consider the case to be binding authority…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence